The word "Average" in the improvements section - possible bias?

[Andee]

My software just came back with the word "Average" as a possibly "biased" word for the first time. It has a link that sends you to Freddies page which says "Use of unsupported or subjective terms or statements to assess or rate, such as, but not limited to, “high,” “low,” “good,” “bad,” “fair,” “poor,” “strong,” “weak,” “rapid,” “slow,” “fast” or “average” without providing a foundation for analysis and contextual information".

We have been conditioned for years to provide the condition of the dwelling in the improvements section for Exterior and Interior, when it says Foundation Walls, and you put in that section "Concrete/Good", "Concrete/New", "Concrete/Average", etc. How do they expect us to describe this and not use the word "Average", "Good", "Fair", "Poor", "Excellent" especially when we are using things like M&S that have it throughout the entire Cost Handbook? They want to know the rating we used or they can't recreate the Cost Approach, if they require it, or do a Cost to Cure. Do we start using words like mediocre? But then, there is no rating for mediocre. This whole thing to me is a joke and stifles us on everything, especially when things like "Rapid", "Stable", and "Slow" are used to describe the growing market with new construction. Maybe those words should be changed to "Speedy", "Durable", and "Lackadaisical". So, is it providing "Context" when we are describing the condition of the dwelling, or is it biased?

 

[Digger88]

use whatever words you want that dont include their 'bias' words and youre good

 

[Dale Floyd]

I wish I was able to give you insight of knowledge and wisdom pertaining to the new guidelines.

Sadly, I got nothing.

Everybody I’ve ever met, understands the word “average”. Is it broad? Yes, but I’ve never heard of damages sought because of the term being used incorrectly.

There is no solution in removing “average”. We will just have to add more unnecessary language explaining that we intend the reader to realize what “average” means, which will also be taken to task by the politically correct insanity we face.

 

[sputnam]

'Average' is not biased. It is subjective and vague.

 

[Tom D]

how about carpet/ok, carpet/nice, carpet/not new, carpet/worn, carpet/woke
you don't have to listen to your program. remember that the coding put in checking it might not realize that average is an material condition term on the appraisal for that specific line.

 

[J Grant]

My software just came back with the word "Average" as a possibly "biased" word for the first time. It has a link that sends you to Freddies page which says "Use of unsupported or subjective terms or statements to assess or rate, such as, but not limited to, “high,” “low,” “good,” “bad,” “fair,” “poor,” “strong,” “weak,” “rapid,” “slow,” “fast” or “average” without providing a foundation for analysis and contextual information".

We have been conditioned for years to provide the condition of the dwelling in the improvements section for Exterior and Interior, when it says Foundation Walls, and you put in that section "Concrete/Good", "Concrete/New", "Concrete/Average", etc. How do they expect us to describe this and not use the word "Average", "Good", "Fair", "Poor", "Excellent" especially when we are using things like M&S that have it throughout the entire Cost Handbook? They want to know the rating we used or they can't recreate the Cost Approach, if they require it, or do a Cost to Cure. Do we start using words like mediocre? But then, there is no rating for mediocre. This whole thing to me is a joke and stifles us on everything, especially when things like "Rapid", "Stable", and "Slow" are used to describe the growing market with new construction. Maybe those words should be changed to "Speedy", "Durable", and "Lackadaisical". So, is it providing "Context" when we are describing the condition of the dwelling, or is it biased?

I suppose I putting in a comment to use on every report that states average/good, etc., is used to rating the condition of materials and building components when rated compared to other building quality materials and components. Take it out of the people/personal realm.

 

[chad hampton]

I use average, good, fair, etc in every report. They are perfect words to describe condition.

 

[DWiley]

Everybody I’ve ever met, understands the word “average”.

Do they? What, exactly, do you mean when you say something is in "average" condition? Is that "average" as defined in the MS handbook? Average for the area? Average for a home of that age and quality?

It has been my experience that there is not a universal application of that term. I have seen reports where an item very near the end of its life was described as "average" because the condition was "typical for the area." I have seen new homes where everything was rated as "average" because most of the homes around it were also new. My all time favorite was a statement that "the home is in average condition as compared to other homes in similar condition"

The term may certainly be used, but context needs to be provided so the reader understands what it means.
The reason it is cited in the Guide is not because of potential bias; it is listed because of the subjective nature of the term if context is not provided. The simple solution is to provide that context.

 

[J Grant]

Do they? What, exactly, do you mean when you say something is in "average" condition? Is that "average" as defined in the MS handbook? Average for the area? Average for a home of that age and quality?

It has been my experience that there is not a universal application of that term. I have seen reports where an item very near the end of its life was described as "average" because the condition was "typical for the area." I have seen new homes where everything was rated as "average" because most of the homes around it were also new. My all time favorite was a statement that "the home is in average condition as compared to other homes in similar condition"

The term may certainly be used, but context needs to be provided so the reader understands what it means.
The reason it is cited in the Guide is not because of potential bias; it is listed because of the subjective nature of the term if context is not provided. The simple solution is to provide that context.

What would be an example of an acceptable context explanation for a word like average?

 

[J Grant]

Do they? What, exactly, do you mean when you say something is in "average" condition? Is that "average" as defined in the MS handbook? Average for the area? Average for a home of that age and quality?

It has been my experience that there is not a universal application of that term. I have seen reports where an item very near the end of its life was described as "average" because the condition was "typical for the area." I have seen new homes where everything was rated as "average" because most of the homes around it were also new. My all time favorite was a statement that "the home is in average condition as compared to other homes in similar condition"

The term may certainly be used, but context needs to be provided so the reader understands what it means.
The reason it is cited in the Guide is not because of potential bias; it is listed because of the subjective nature of the term if context is not provided. The simple solution is to provide that context.

But if it is flagged as a code word, then average, good etc are there as potential bias, which sorry to say is inane - in USPAP the retire definitions because the standard English dictirionary usage is considered adequate.

Every human with a working brain over the age of eight understands what average, good, or excellent means. They are not subjective words, they are despite words. The only way these words fail is if they are incompetently applied - the C ratings and Q ratings, which are defined and numerical, can compensate for any "subjectivity" of words like average or good.

Teh sales comparison approach is a COMPARISON. So unless one house or portion of a property, such as a view or condition, can be compared as superior or inferior to another, or equivalent to, similar to another, - then how can a comparison even be made?